Mini 280 - Game Over

[vikingfan]

I still like my Fiasco vote for now. I will, however,

FOS passdog

for not posting. Another couple days like this and I'll be ready to recommend a replacement.

[Jaguar]

I clearly stated that I would vote for the silent ones. Maybe you disagree, maybe you don't. Frankly when I see your name at the bottom of the page, indicating you are online, and then you do not make a response, if only to say "hello and I think so-and-so is acting suspicious," then I'll vote for you.

Now, since there hasn't been a peep out of Passdog I'll Vote: Passdog.

Regardless of your views towards voting the silent ones, you'll have to admit that it does force them into being active.

How can I make a post when I haven't had a chance to read the thread (as mentioned I was online 2 secs before heading out)? And your vote didn't force me to post. I was going to post yesterday anyways, regardless of your vote on me.

Lurker hunting is somewhat effective, but non-poster hunting is downright silly. Why vote / lynch someone who is not posting at all, rather than trying to get them prodded or replaced?

[Fiasco]

Hmmm... eight out of eight people suspecting me now. Groupthink much?

Some miscellaneous comments; a more systematic game analysis post is still in the pipeline.

LoudmouthLee, I never believed there were four scum in one group -- that was a misinterpretation on Aelyn's part. It's very clear from the death scene that we don't have one unified scum group. There were two kills, one of them strongly suggesting a fundamentalist-christian SK and one of them strongly suggesting a mafia group. This makes your claim that I have inside information about a unified four-person scum group rather bizarre; your (possible) attempt to spread confusion about the game setup is noted.

Jaguar, Aelyn announced his intention to vote for me soon; apparently, he believes the evidence is sufficient for a fourth vote. That, to me, is suspicious.

On lurker-hunting: I agree with KingPin. Lurker-hunting is an essential part of pro-town strategy, if only for metagame reasons, and that LoudmouthLee is attacking KingPin for it does not make LoudmouthLee look good. I disagree with the vote on Jaguar, because of the post in V/LA and because she wasn't quiet for that long a time. (However, you can't tell from what the forum shows you that someone is on for just two seconds.) I agree with the vote on Passdog; we don't know that his lurking is unintentional, and it can't hurt.

[LoudmouthLee]

I did quickly retract and apologize. I got confused in my notes.

(RE: unified group)

[Jaguar]

To me, lurking is being online and perhaps even posting in other games, mish mash, or other parts of the site, but not posting in current game. Passdog has not posted anywhere on scum since Sunday evening, so I don't call that lurking. I call that being absent. Therefore, a vote on Passdog is not doing us any good, because he is obviously not on the site to check the games he is in. (And yes, he is in more than one at the moment). Yes, he has been absent for more than 48 hours, and yes, he should have posted somewhere, but the fact that he hasn't posted anywhere does not make him a lurker.

Lurkers are people who post very little in a game or try to avoid being seen as a lurker by posting no content in the posts that they are posting. This is why I disagree with the vote and FOSes on Passdog.

You want to go lurker hunting, look at Don Gaetano who has two meaningless posts in this game and has posted in two other mini's that he's participating in yesterday, while his past post in this game was on Monday. Now that is what I call lurking.

As a matter of fact, to support my point I will

vote: Don Gaetano

.

[Fiasco]

Agreed: that's probably an even better type of lurker vote. From that perspective I'm actually very happy with my vote on draygn_mage.

[LyingBrian]

• Vote Count:
  • 3) Fiasco
    • draygn_mage
    • LoudmouthLee
    • vikingfan
  • 2) draygn_mage
    • Fiasco
    • Norinel
  • 1) Aelyn
    • Don Gaetano
  • 1) Don Gaetano
    • Jaguar
  • 1) Passdog
    • KingPin
  • 2)
    not voting
    • Aelyn
    • Passdog
• Lynch:
  6 votes

[LoudmouthLee]

I find the following to be very interesting:

Fiasco's wagon has stalled. That means either the scum don't want to be on the wagon, or that the scum is already on the wagon.

No FoSes to throw around, but recently, Fiasco has eased some of my suspicions. I may consider an unvote if a better target rolls along (Which could be D_M or Norniel)

Norn's posts have gotten me rather uneasy lately. I will quote a little bit later.

[KingPin]

LML,

I agree that the 'bandwagon' for Fiasco has stalled and with your idea that scum is either not willing to act on it or already on it.

I think there is probably one Scum member on that wagon. I believe that there is a group of 3 scum and 1 SK (historically a normal setup).

The defensive actions by Fiasco are somewhat to be expected, as a newbie. Though, I remember a time when I was fairly new and got called out and strung up for being overly defensive.

[Jaguar]

The Fiasco wagon stalling is not so strange. A few people have/had FOS'es on him and wanted more of a response or more time before committing to a vote. Some of those people haven't posted much lately!

In addition, I do tend to get fairly defensive myself for getting votes early with not much to go on. And when nobody believes you when you are telling the truth, it's hard to take.

I'm not sure if I'm completely satisfied that Fiasco is not scum, but there is a better target out there at this moment in my eyes. I'd like to see LML's points on Norinel and I'd like to hear a lot more from those individuals with only one or two posts.

[Don Gaetano]

You want to go lurker hunting, look at Don Gaetano who has two meaningless posts in this game and has posted in two other mini's that he's participating in yesterday, while his past post in this game was on Monday. Now that is what I call lurking.

Sorry, for not posting, I'll do my best to change that as soon as possible. Still I think the above is excellent posting and it's nice to see that I'm not the only one that thinks like that . The reason why I haven't posted much and why I sadly might post a bit less than expected later aswell, is that I've been working double shifts for the last week, and I'll continue to do so next week. When I have had time to post on the site, I guess I've given more developed game priority, sorry. I'll try to change that. I'm ashamed to say that hadn't it been for posts like Jaguar's above, I would've most likely posted again even later.

Sadly, right now I have other games where I also haven't been active, so I'll have to post there. I'll hopefully post some actual game-related content unlike this post, tomorow. Let me just say that I think Fiasco is most likely innocent, and that I also agree with Kingpin that the bandwagon has probably stalled because some scum are on the bandwagon, not because Fiasco is scum.

[vikingfan]

I could tend to agree that there are mostly likely scum on the wagon, but there is a second alternative as well- there is usually a big difference in perception with votes at this stage of the game. 3 votes is considered safe, while 4 is considered getting close to a lynch- I agree with Jaguar on this. Scum or town alike are probably not inclined to take such a step this early in the game since it would call attention to them. As Jaguar said, a few people FOSed him and wanted more of a response or more time- I believe one player said that they would have voted him if not for there being 3 votes already. So yes, I think it's quite possible there's scum on the wagon, but it's also quite likely game policy as well.

Let's not forget we have an inactive member as well in Passdog that can skew our numbers. Any chance we can get a prod or replacement on him?

[Don Gaetano]

I've re-read the thread, and I quickly figured out that nothing has really happened except the bandwagon on Fiasco. I'll keep my random-vote for now since there isn't really any better home for my vote IMHO.

[Jaguar]

I've re-read the thread, and I quickly figured out that nothing has really happened except the bandwagon on Fiasco. I'll keep my random-vote for now since there isn't really any better home for my vote IMHO.

So do you have a reason other than "there isn't really any better home for my vote" to keep it on Aelyn? That's really not a good reason. Do you find Aelyn scummy? And what are your thoughts on the Fiasco wagon? Do you support it, not support it? What?

As a matter of fact, I find it scummier than your non-posting/non-content posting earlier and I will gladly keep my vote on you.

And if you can't handle the time commitment, send a note to LyingBrian and ask to be replaced. Don't say that you are spending more time in the more developed games because you give them priority over this one. All games are equally important to the people in them.

Sadly, right now I have other games where I also haven't been active, so I'll have to post there.

But you posted in those games more recently than this one. You call that not having been active? I call that trying to appear more innocent than you are. And if there are other games that you haven't participated in as much as you should have, all the more reason to ask to be replaced in one or more of them.

[Don Gaetano]

So do you have a reason other than "there isn't really any better home for my vote" to keep it on Aelyn? That's really not a good reason. Do you find Aelyn scummy? And what are your thoughts on the Fiasco wagon? Do you support it, not support it? What?

I have no reason to move my vote, it doesn't have anything to do with Aelyn. I've already said what I think about the Fiasco wagon.

And if you can't handle the time commitment, send a note to LyingBrian and ask to be replaced. Don't say that you are spending more time in the more developed games because you give them priority over this one. All games are equally important to the people in them.

I just apologized for spending more times in more developed games, I said sorry, what more do you expect. When I said that I'll have less time online the next week than normally, I'm not saying I won't post next week, just don't expect me to be the nr.1 poster which I have a tendency to be.

But you posted in those games more recently than this one. You call that not having been active? I call that trying to appear more innocent than you are. And if there are other games that you haven't participated in as much as you should have, all the more reason to ask to be replaced in one or more of them.

I did not post in those games more recently than this one. In survivor mafia, I last posted the same day as I last posted here, when I wrote that, and I didn't just talk about games on mafiascum.

FOS: Jaguar

for not paying attention, or deliberately misrepresenting what I said.

[Fiasco]

Since the bandwagon on me seems to have lost a lot of momentum, I will defend myself less and attack others more than I had planned.

First, some defense.

I can see how my behavior seemed defensive (he said defensively): I did respond a lot, sometimes a bit angrily, and I did overstate the danger in my bandwagon somewhat. Partly this is a matter of playing style: I tend to be overly active on a per-game basis, and I genuinely don't see the harm in making a quick comment, one-liner or not, whenever checking the thread. Partly it's because I was in an irritated mood then, due to what I perceived (and mostly still perceive) as a nonsense bandwagon on me, as well as due to other reasons. (Aelyn compared me to "a trapped mongoose, flurrying around in an attempt to escape but all the while just drawing more and more attention"; it felt more like being under attack by mosquitoes, frantically wielding a flyswatter.) Partly it's because the votes on me were piling up within hours; it looked more threatening then than it does in hindsight.

I feel that I've already responded adequately to the whole "assuming" fiasco, which is what all three votes against me were originally based on. I indicated incomplete certainty about something that I would be uncertain about as scum, and uncertain about as town, but slightly more uncertain about as scum than as town. That, IMHO, is a very weak tell at most, especially considering the WIFOM factor: if I were scum worrying about a guilty cop investigation, I would have no motive to make any mention of this.

Now for the attack. Who looks (un)scummy?

Don Gaetano:

I thought he looked scummy for FoSing me for a bad reason and then lurking; however, he claims the lurking was because of time constraints, and his low activity level means that he will be hard to judge. He also thinks I'm innocent now, which earns him Townie Points from my perspective (but maybe not yours). I'm not sure what to think of the Gaetano-vs-Jaguar argument.

LoudmouthLee:

An interesting case. He gets points for being an active and aggressive player, which is risky for scum. On the other hand, since he's supposed to be a Mafia God, I hold him to high standards. He mostly hasn't lived up to them in this game. He instigated the bandwagon because of the "assuming" thing that he didn't really defend later. Later he accused me of having info about a four-scum group, which is very improbable. He also argued against lurker hunts.

draygn_mage:

Still my favorite target. Jumped onto the bandwagon citing his own mistake in another game (but from what I can tell from a quick look, it wasn't really similar -- he said "cop" when he should have said "claimed cop", which in my opinion is scummier than what I did), and didn't believe my true "first random vote" statement.

His only recent contribution was a joke, even though he's been very active elsewhere on the site, and there's been enough stuff to talk about.

vikingfan:

Third person on the bandwagon, but didn't seem really enthusiastic about it. Has announced that he will unvote if the lynch goes too quick; if it's going to come to that, and if he *doesn't* unvote, then he's going to look very scummy. Otherwise, not particularly.

Aelyn:

Has posted nothing but one attack on me, and has been the only player not averse to a fourth vote.


I have nothing interesting to say about the others; they don't look especially scummy or townish.

My main suspects right now are draygn_mage, LoudmouthLee, and Aelyn.

confirm vote: draygn_mage

.

[Jaguar]

Gon Gaetano, I actually missed the last couple of sentences in your third post where you briefly talked about the Fiasco wagon. And I did not realize you were in more than this game and the two games you had posted in on Tuesday. My apologies.

I have no reason to move my vote, it doesn't have anything to do with Aelyn.

I've been trying to figure out what you mean by this. Do you have a reason to keep your vote on Aelyn? Just because there are no others you want to vote for, doesn't mean it justifies your random vote for someone. Why does it have nothing to do with Aelyn? It has everything to do with him, because that is where your vote is. You can always unvote and not vote for anyone at all. I think that is less scummy than keeping a random vote on a person without a reason.

He also thinks I'm innocent now, which earns him Townie Points from my perspective (but maybe not yours).

LOL. So any scum can garner townie points by believing people are innocent? A bit of faulty reasoning there. The only person I know that is innocent is me. All the rest of you could be scum as far as I know, and simply believing that someone is pro-town/innocent is not good enough to convince me that a person is pro-town.

Mod

, can you please prod Aelyn, Nori and draygn_mage? Any luck on replacing/prodding Passdog yet?

[Fiasco]

Jaguar, read that sentence again, especially the seven words at the end.

[LoudmouthLee]

An interesting case. He gets points for being an active and aggressive player, which is risky for scum.

Some of the best scum i have ever seen is active and aggressive. IMHO, an active scum who is strongest is who who doesn't start bandwagons, but is normally the 2nd vote or 3rd. Scum don't normally hammer unless they have nothing to fear.

On the other hand, since he's supposed to be a Mafia God, I hold him to high standards.

That was proclaimed by Pie is Good, and I'm honored that you hold me to that. I'll make sure to try to live up to my expectations.

He mostly hasn't lived up to them in this game. He instigated the bandwagon because of the "assuming" thing that he didn't really defend later.

Disagreement: My vote on you has not changed. My record for finding scum in the first few posts is outstanding. Please ask Vaughn about that one. You say that "scum wouldn't be that careless" and "yes, I would out myself on my first post" still seems like scum caught in headlights. I'm not moving my vote as of now.

Later he accused me of having info about a four-scum group, which is very improbable.

My notes in my games got crossed, and I did post a correction mere hours later.

He also argued against lurker hunts.

And I will until the day I die.

Lurker hunts, IMHO, are simply ways for the scum to throw undue suspicion on townies. I will point to a game in which I was scum and managed to lynch *3* lurkers. (Jeepfest Mafia), just because they were lurkers.

They are generally EASY targets by the scum to point to, and even moreso, easy townies for the town to lynch based on their inactivity.

Lurkers are not people who don't post, they are people who "just post enough to skate by". Passdog shouldn't have ANY votes yet, and I find the people who have voted them suspicious.

My vote stands.

[Fiasco]

You say that "scum wouldn't be that careless" and "yes, I would out myself on my first post" still seems like scum caught in headlights.

That was me being annoyed at an accusation of both scumminess AND stupidity.

Your alleged ability to detect scum from their first post, even if it were perfect, would only tell us something *if* we assumed you're pro-town, which may very well be false. To the extent that I think you're a capable scum-finder, I also think you're a scum, because from your very first vote you've been attacking someone I (and only I) know to be pro-town.

My notes in my games got crossed, and I did post a correction mere hours later.

That wasn't really a correction, and you posted it only when you got called on it. But this isn't the point! The point is that you, believing that I assumed four unified scum,

thought this was because I had inside information

, which in turn would imply that it was

actually true

, when it

clearly wasn't true because of the death scene

. If you were pro-town rather than a scum looking to spread confusion, the logical conclusion would have been that, if I believed in four unified scum, I would be either mistaken, or deliberately spreading lies,

not

that I knew the truth and chose to post about it.

[Norinel]

Norn's posts have gotten me rather uneasy lately. I will quote a little bit later.

Misspellings aside, would you?

On the other hand, since he's supposed to be a Mafia God, I hold him to high standards.

That was proclaimed by Pie is Good, and I'm honored that you hold me to that. I'll make sure to try to live up to my expectations.

He mostly hasn't lived up to them in this game. He instigated the bandwagon because of the "assuming" thing that he didn't really defend later.

Disagreement: My vote on you has not changed. My record for finding scum in the first few posts is outstanding.

The transition from humility to but-I-will-call-in-this-awesome-reputation disturbs me. Particularly because half the reason LML was going after Fiasco in the first few posts was the misinterpretation of the whole "(Assuming it was random)" thing.

Lurker hunts, IMHO, are simply ways for the scum to throw undue suspicion on townies. I will point to a game in which I was scum and managed to lynch *3* lurkers. (Jeepfest Mafia), just because they were lurkers.

They are generally EASY targets by the scum to point to, and even moreso, easy townies for the town to lynch based on their inactivity.

You seem to be confounding lurker hunts with lynching lurkers, which aren't quite the same thing. Most lurker hunters would claim that they'll take off their vote if the lurker shows up and starts posting with content.

Mod

, can you please prod Aelyn, Nori and draygn_mage? Any luck on replacing/prodding Passdog yet?

As a sidenote, I generally get on exactly once a day. I'll usually post in games I'm in when I'm on; the fact that I didn't yesterday seems a bit soon to be calling for prods.

LML is setting off more alarms than before, and Jaguar seems a little too focussed on Don Gaetano and activity in general, but the vote stays for now, I think.

MOD NOTE

Passdog

has been prodded.

[LyingBrian]

• Vote Count:
  • 3) Fiasco
    • draygn_mage
      
    • LoudmouthLee
      
    • vikingfan
  • 2) draygn_mage
    • Fiasco
      
    • Norinel
  • 1) Aelyn
    • Don Gaetano
  • 1) Don Gaetano
    • Jaguar
  • 1) Passdog
    • KingPin
  • 2)
    not voting
    • Aelyn
      
    • Passdog
• Lynch:
  6 votes

[draygn_mage]

Not really sure what to think at this point. It would be WIFOM to discuss why the Fiasco wagon didn't move.

Is it because the scum are already on it? Probably not due as I have yet to see 3 scum single-handedly start a bandwagon on an innocent townie and NOT get caught later.

Is it because the scum don't want on it? Possibly, but why is the real question here. Maybe because they don't want to bandwagon one of their own? At the same time, could a scum be sure that the bandwagon would successfully stop? No, and they would then be under scrutiny for NOT being on it. They would want to be on it in order to distance themselves.

After a quick re-read, I am more interesting in Aelyn for the "I might vote, but not yet" post. He wasn't even half-way to lynch yet. If you place the 4th vote, would 3 scum have given themselves up to speedlynch him? Hell no and you are veteran enough of a player to know that.

unvote, vote Aelyn

[Don Gaetano]

Some people might disagree with me, but I don't see any reason to unvote anyone day one when I have no better targets for my vote. Atleast not when I was the only person voting for him. Besides, I think draygn_mage made a good enough point against Aelyn to deserve a vote early on day one, so I think my vote has a pretty good home where it is.

[Fiasco]

Except that it's 6 to lynch, not 7.